Anyone thinking “Bronson” was the bio pic about the “Death Wish” actor Charles Bronson will be quite surprised to find what appears on their TV when they pop the DVD in. I didn’t make it to the theatrical release and am catching up to films I’ve missed in 2009 and started with this because of the exceptional buzz surrounding Tom Hardy’s leading performance.

While I’ll get to my issues regarding the film as a whole, first and foremost the film is a showcase of Hardy’s fearless portrayal of perhaps Britain’s most notorious criminal, Michael Peterson. Still in jail after 30 plus years (nearly all of it spent in solitary confinement), Peterson is a human wrecking ball with apparently even less of a conscience. His only apparent goal in life is to bash in the skulls of everyone around him. He loves the notoriety and perceived status it affords him, eventually taking on the moniker of Charles Bronson in homage to the actor (though really, it could have been any big name action star).

Hardy gives his all to the role, quite literally as there are numerous full frontal nudity shots of the actor. He is asked to be the personification of rage and he gives himself over willingly. However, what sets the role apart and elevates it above just simply the tale of a brutal fighting machine are is the juxtaposition of prison scenes with that of Bronson on a stage, telling his story and his thoughts to a fictitious audience. It’s an excellent method that director Nicolas Winding Refn employs to show another side to the character.

And make no mistake, the film is solely about Bronson and is not your standard bio pic. Rather than be tied to specific points in his life, making it a simple retelling of his exploits, the film is much more an exploration of how this man thinks. He’s sent to a mental institution but eventually declared sane, in part shown in the film because he repeats the same violent acts over and over again, knowing he will get the same response. The insane thing would be to expect a different outcome, but that’s just not Bronson’s style.

My problems with the film overall stem from how myopic the story becomes. Sure, it’s an examination of this man, and in many ways an examination of the human condition, but the constant fighting and raging against the system becomes monotonous and almost numbing. It was easy to lose the point and simply see it as a mad man beating up cops, when there was much more underneath.

Still, if the story interests you and you’re a fan of films like “Chopper” – where Eric Bana turned in an equally impressive performance – go ahead and check out “Bronson”. A 3.5 out of 5, Hardy’s performance alone is worth checking out and if the distributors and people behind the scenes can push for it, you may see him nominated in the months to come.

I know I am very late to the party, but in my opinion this is one of the better films to come out in the last few years. I think the biggest difficulty the film has is that it wasn’t made for an audience, and the Refn’s reputation as an “auteur” hasn’t preceded him yet. If this film had the imprint of a name like Kubrick, then a more discerning gaze would be applied.

Bronson is a primal force as much as a character. The unbridled id, libido… the underlying violence that is the shadow of civilization. All attempts, from family to employment, from medication to isolation, fail to effectively tame the man. In fact, Bronson only becomes more appealing and fascinating. The stage is there throughout the film, when you see him it is a reveal to break the spell and recognize that you are seeing all events from his gaze.

Personally, I believe that Refn, if allowed to develop a body work, will eventually be scrutinized with the kind of academic glare reserved for filmmakers like Fuller or Cassavetes. Am I saying he is that good? Not yet. I am saying he is that fascinating, which is a hell of a lot more than I can say for what passes for entertainment these days.

http://soberingconclusion.com/movies/?page_id=904 Ian Forbes

Better late than never, Eric.

Nopparat

Response to LovestoSpooge:Exactly my point, you could cast anyone, so why not cast somoene with some acting chops and not Michelle Rodriguez for the 50th time. And to also reference something else, remember Uma Thurman in Kill Bill? Pretty amazing even though all of her stunts were preformed by Zoe Bell, so yes, you can cast a normal actress and get one of the most memorable female leads in an action film of all time. And since this is the internet shut up you whiny bitches and accept the fact that even if you get your way and some 110 pound twenty something plays Wonder Woman the movie will still suck.

Browse the Site

Meta

Archived Entry

Set free onto the Internet :

Friday, Nov 27th, 2009 at 8:14 pm

Sobering Conclusion
is powered by WordPress 3.1.4
and delivered to you in 0.326 seconds using 36 queries.
All images and screen shots are the property of their respective owners. Filmography links courtesy of The Internet Movie Database.
** The opinions on this site are done for entertainment purposes only, mostly mine. Copyright 2005-2013.
Any similarity to a real review or actual information is unintentional and unfortunate. Eat Snacky Smores.